- From: Doug Schepers via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 17:13:14 +0000
- To: public-annotation@w3.org
While I'm sympathetic to the rationale, this seems like it would make the model more complex, less efficient for processing, introduce possible conflicting behaviors, and decrease interoperability. 1) Structurally, this is explicitly more complex. Complexity's not necessarily bad, but it's a tradeoff that doesn't seem to be worth it (at least without more concrete and pressing use cases). 2) If the UA is treating different `role`s/`motive`s with different presentations or functionality (e.g. the copy-edit use case), it's already a burden to have to dig into each body to get the `role`; forcing them to treat each `role` as an unstructured array in which different values can be in any order, and to scan for each type of role value in each body is going to be inherently hard (e.g. computationally expensive) to process. 3) If there are multiple role values, where different UAs may process and present them each uniquely, there is a strong chance that some combinations of roles may conflict with each other. For example, if a client presents `commenting` and `editing` and `tagging' in 3 distinct ways, how should it present a single body that had all 3 role values? 4) Sometimes, the best thing a spec can do for interoperability is to *limit* options, leaving only a single clear way to **do it right**. If we increase the options on what role value to add to single the intent for any particular body, there is likely to be a profusion of different combinations, meaning different UAs will have to deal with non-specified combinations that each generator arbitrarily assigns. There should be a single minimally-ambiguous role value for each type of body, such that interoperability emerges between different annotation systems. We are still in the early phases of this annotation model, and there is very little real-world experience for UI presentation for these different role values; to the extent that they are backed by real-world examples (e.g. in Hypothesis, Twitter, Facebook, MS Word, etc.), many of these role values already have distinct presentations. I expect that over time, patterns for presenting many of these role values would emerge, improving the user experience. But if we let UAs mix different role values, there won't be an opportunity to find how each is best presented (or just processed) on its own. If real-world experience doesn't bear out this distinct processing, there could be an opportunity to allow multiple role values in some future version of the spec, but I suggest we defer this to a later version, even if we don't close it outright. If we find common combinations of role values that would elicit specific processing and presentation behavior, then we can mint new role values that address both sets of needs simultaneously. -- GitHub Notification of comment by shepazu Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/104#issuecomment-158463032 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 20 November 2015 17:13:18 UTC